All inspections: Central Bedfordshire Domiciliary Care Services South

Central Bedfordshire Domiciliary Care Service South is one of two domiciliary care services run by Central Bedfordshire Council to provide short term domiciliary care to people requiring support for a period of up to about six weeks for rehabilitation. At the time of our inspection 19 people were using the service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People using the service felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs of abuse and felt confident in how to report them.

People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be in a safe manner. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety, and balanced these against people’s rights to take risks and remain independent.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, to support people with their needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the provider. Staff were not offered employment until satisfactory checks had been completed. Staff received an induction and on-going training. They had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people. They were supported with regular supervisions.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service.

People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people. Staff gained consent before supporting people.

At the time of the inspection, some people required minimal support to eat well.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People were involved in the planning of their care and support.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

People knew how to complain. There was a complaints procedure in place and accessible to all.

Quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We inspected the service on 28 April 2015. The inspection was unannounced. When we last inspected the service in January 2014 we found that the provider was meeting their legal requirements in the areas that we looked at.

The service provides short term care and support for a maximum period of six weeks during which people are encouraged to regain their independence. The service assesses whether people require ongoing support at the end of this period and if so they are referred on to another provider. At the time of our inspection the service provided support to 40 people.

The service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During our inspection we found that people who used the service were safe. Staff were aware of the safeguarding process. Personalised risk assessments were in place to reduce the risk of harm to people. There were effective processes in place to administer people’s medicines and referrals to other health and social care professionals were made when appropriate to maintain people’s health and well-being.

There were enough skilled, qualified staff to provide for people’s needs. Recruitment and selection processes were in place and the provider had taken steps to ensure that staff were suitable to work with people who used the service. They were trained and supported by way of supervisions, appraisals and regular audits of the way in which they delivered care.

People had been involved in determining their support needs and how they would like to be supported. Their consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health and well-being.

Staff were kind and considerate. They treated people with dignity and respect. They assisted people to be as independent as possible and to maintain their interests and hobbies.

People and their relatives had been involved in deciding what support they were to receive and how this was to be given. Relatives were involved in the regular review of people’s support needs and were kept informed of any changes to a person’s health or well-being.

There was an up to date complaints policy in place and a copy of the complaints system was included in the folder kept at people’s home, which also included other information about the service.

There was an open culture and staff were supported by the managers. Staff were aware of the visions and values of the provider. People, relatives and staff were able to make suggestions as to how the service was provided and developed.

We spoke with seven people who used the service and a relative of someone using the service. All the people we spoke with told us that they received a good service from the agency. One person said, 'I am very happy, they always ask me if I need anything else.' Another person told us, 'I cannot give enough praise to all the staff.'

People told us they were involved in setting their own goals with the service and always consented to the support being provided. We saw that person centred goals were identified for people as part of the re-ablement service. People's progress towards their goals was reviewed on a regular basis by senior staff and where appropriate, referrals made for additional intervention from relevant professionals.

Staff told us that they felt supported in their roles and we found that staff were receiving supervision meetings and observations of their practice at regular intervals as specified by the provider. One member of staff said, 'We always get help when we need it.'

We found that the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received and to handle any complaints that were received. These were dealt with in a timely manner.

During our visit to Central Bedfordshire Domiciliary Care Service South on 5 October 2012, people told us they thought the care they received was ''excellent'' and they received a 'very good service'. Most people had been receiving support and care for only a short time, as the service is designed to provide ''reablement'' care. This involved supporting people's return to self-caring living or as a short term solution prior to moving to other services. The service can provide care and support for up to 40 people, although this varies on a daily basis. We were told that people usually receive support for up to six weeks. One person told us the staff were 'very good people'. Another said staff were 'very willing' and they 'really couldn't find any fault with them.' All spoke of the respect staff showed them.

Staff we met spoke enthusiastically about helping people regain their abilities and independence. This was reflected in the positive comments from people receiving the service.

Archived: Central Bedfordshire Domiciliary Care Services South

All Inspections

18 January 2018

During a routine inspection

28 April 2015

During a routine inspection

7, 8 January 2014

During a routine inspection

5 October 2012

During a routine inspection